Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ya I'll agree and say that could be what most people want, but most people live in auto dependent areas. I'd use a car to haul heavy stuff from time to time.
I am at the edge of gen x and millennialist so I have traits of both. I know quite a few people my age who haven't bothered to get a license. Some haven't even had a permit. It just isn't a priority for them at all, even though most could ford cars if they wanted and have salaries way above average. I come across higher numbers of millennialist with this attitude as well. If I had gone to high school elsewhere I likely would have been the same. I had little interest in learning to drive as a teen, but my dad forced me.
I am at the edge of gen x and millennialist so I have traits of both. I know quite a few people my age who haven't bothered to get a license. Some haven't even had a permit. It just isn't a priority for them at all, even though most could ford cars if they wanted and have salaries way above average. I come across higher numbers of millennialist with this attitude as well. If I had gone to high school elsewhere I likely would have been the same. I had little interest in learning to drive as a teen, but my dad forced me.
Given the choice, I'd rather live in a non car dependent area. With that said, if I needed to haul something heavy around once a week it'd be nice to have a car(maybe I'd just rent a car for how little it'd be used). Even here many people my age at least would like to live in walkable areas.
Ya I'll agree and say that could be what most people want, but most people live in auto dependent areas. I'd use a car to haul heavy stuff from time to time.
So most people are stupid because they don't think like you do. Gotcha.
Being a non-car dependent area really wasn't a concern for me at all I when I moved back to the States. It's very easy to drive to accomplish day to day errands and costs less than buying a ticket to use the bus. Faster, cheaper, more flexible. Regardless of where I lived, I knew I was going to have to drive for work.
I picked the non-car dependent neighborhood because I didn't want to drive into downtown Seattle and pay $200/month for parking. So I moved someplace where I could walk to work. Since my lifestyle didn't require a car, I was very happy to "lose" it along with the hundreds of dollars a month I spent to park and insure it.
So most people are stupid because they don't think like you do. Gotcha.
Being a non-car dependent area really wasn't a concern for me at all I when I moved back to the States. It's very easy to drive to accomplish day to day errands and costs less than buying a ticket to use the bus. Faster, cheaper, more flexible. Regardless of where I lived, I knew I was going to have to drive for work.
I picked the non-car dependent neighborhood because I didn't want to drive into downtown Seattle and pay $200/month for parking. So I moved someplace where I could walk to work. Since my lifestyle didn't require a car, I was very happy to "lose" it along with the hundreds of dollars a month I spent to park and insure it.
The biggest complaints I here from older suburban folk here is the expenses of cities, not even talking about NYC but you mention Chicago around here and they'll say it's too expensive. So of course people compromise. If more people had the money to raise a family in a city and could afford to send kids to a private school, I think things would even out more(aka more would choose to).
Think what will happen when more public schools start improving in cities... It's not like growing up I was thinking about I need to be in a walkable place, it was my first trips to cities like boston, ny, chi etc that I started to think wow I'd love to live in those places as opposed to where I'm from. It's so easy to get around in those places.
Also I don't buy your argument of transit being more expensive than a car, say I move to NYC and pay 120 a month for transit pass, that's roughly 1500 dollars for the year. My parents spend easily over 500 dollars a month on gas alone. My dad had to pay a 2k tax on his particular vehicle, the shocks replacement cost 1500 dollars. I'm not even getting to things like insurance and monthly car payments. Michigan also has one of the highest insurance per annul rates, the average spent is 1200 per year. Oh ya, gas also won't be dropping any time soon.
Lastly, wouldn't you say most people are making the smart choice of trying to make the most of their money? Why try to live where you can't afford?
Most people would like to lose the car dependency, but they also don't want to lose their car. You can own a car and not be in a car-dependent area, which is the best of both worlds transportation-wise, and is what most people are looking for (at least in theory). That way one can take a car, walk, or take transit depending on which is best for that particular trip.
I agree with this. I see it all around me here in Portland. People have their bikes and walk a lot but that doesn't eliminate their cars. And often I see them choose their cars over public transportation to travel anyplace else but work.
I grew up when people didn't use the words "trend" or "car experience" in regard to using cars so that makes me chuckle a bit. I was a kid in Chicago born in the mid forties and growing up there with excellent public transportation many of my parents friends and neighbors did not even own cars. But they weren't considered anything special. And no one had more than one car.
It's good to see people wanting to get back to using more public transportation under any circumstances. But I would definitely say it takes a certain amount of understand as to how to use it. It takes patience for one thing. Like anything else, you have to learn and understand how it works.
The biggest complaints I here from older suburban folk here is the expenses of cities, not even talking about NYC but you mention Chicago around here and they'll say it's too expensive. So of course people compromise. If more people had the money to raise a family in a city and could afford to send kids to a private school, I think things would even out more(aka more would choose to).
Think what will happen when more public schools start improving in cities... It's not like growing up I was thinking about I need to be in a walkable place, it was my first trips to cities like boston, ny, chi etc that I started to think wow I'd love to live in those places as opposed to where I'm from. It's so easy to get around in those places.
Lastly, wouldn't you say most people are making the smart choice of trying to make the most of their money? Why try to live where you can't afford?
Yes. That's why so many people choose to live in suburbs. Not everyone has $50-60k/year to send their kids to private school, $10,000/month for the mortgage/rent payment on the Noe Valley condo. Even of those who do, many just prefer to live somewhere else. Marin, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties all have significantly higher median incomes than San Francisco County.
Also I don't buy your argument of transit being more expensive than a car, say I move to NYC and pay 120 a month for transit pass, that's roughly 1500 dollars for the year. My parents spend easily over 500 dollars a month on gas alone. My dad had to pay a 2k tax on his particular vehicle, the shocks replacement cost 1500 dollars. I'm not even getting to things like insurance and monthly car payments. Michigan also has one of the highest insurance per annul rates, the average spent is 1200 per year. Oh ya, gas also won't be dropping any time soon.
How much of your federal, state and city income taxes or any other taxes are used to fund public transportation?
Public transportation might seem cheaper but I'm not convinced that it really is.
Portland costs $2.06 per ride for light rail and $2.39 per ride for bus service.
IRS rates for cars work out pretty well for solo-driving of fleet vehicles (Camry, Taurus, what not) that's pretty much brand-new. That's 56.5 cents a mile. So as long as you're riding the bus for more than 4 miles, it's cheaper to ride the bus than drive a near-new/brand-new fleet-type vehicle. In other words, I suspect they come out pretty comparable. I mean, I'm just guessing that the average bus trip in Portland is somewhere around 4 miles.
The major difference, is that people who use public transit tend not to consume as much transportation as people who drive. Excluding commuter services, how many people are logging 10,000+ miles on public transit a year? Probably not many. Most of the cost of owning a car is fixed. You're insurance isn't much higher if you drive 20,000 a year than 5,000 a year and so on.
The major difference, is that people who use public transit tend not to consume as much transportation as people who drive. Excluding commuter services, how many people are logging 10,000+ miles on public transit a year? Probably not many. Most of the cost of owning a car is fixed. You're insurance isn't much higher if you drive 20,000 a year than 5,000 a year and so on.
16,560 miles / year for my mom. She puts about 8,000 / year on her car. But yes, that's a commuter service (LIRR).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
